…is trying to decode death. Though, in reading, it’s more complicated than the headline. I heard him speak at a space conference a few years ago, interesting guy. And I’m fascinated by the hostility from his fellow scientists.
Category Archives: Technology and Society
Historical Physics
Why do we spend so much time teaching it?
To me, understanding how we developed the knowledge is key to understanding the science itself.
CAFE
Automakers ask Pruitt to roll back the Obama rules on mileage.
CAFE should be repealed, period. Also federal toilet-tank standards, and light-bulb laws. The federal government has no business whatsoever telling us what how efficient our personal items should be.
Cancer
…as a metabolic disease. A long but interesting essay.
At least the community is starting to wake up to the hazards of sugar. I’ve seen a proposal to make food stamps ineligible for items containing it. Makes sense to me. It could help a lot with the obesity epidemic.
[Update a few minutes later]
Related thoughts from Glenn Reynolds.
[Update a few more minutes later]
Health authorities continue to fail us:
Considering the above, no one in their right mind would take any kind of dietary advice provided by the authorities at face value. It’s little wonder then that so many are taking matters into their own hands. Thirty years ago, if the USDA, AHA, or AMA told you something was bad for you, you stopped eating it. You didn’t question, because they were the ones with credibility and years of study. It was simply too much trouble for the average person to find the information they needed. Thankfully with the internet, all of the information needed is now available to anyone who wants it. We no longer have to put blind trust in authority figures because we can sift through the information ourselves and ask the right questions. If anything, the glut of information shows that the public’s trust in nutrition advice given by the authorities and media was sorely misplaced.
Same thing with climate, for the same reasons: there’s a lot of public policy, and money, at stake.
The Father Of Cryonics
…never really died. A brief bio of Bob Ettinger.
Of course, it’s worth noting that cryonicists do believe that patients in suspension aren’t dead. That only occurs after information death (as occurs rotting in a grave, or being cremated).
Climate Models
…are flawed. That’s putting it mildly:
Professor Curry said: “It’s not just the fact that climate simulations are tuned that is problematic. It may well be that it is impossible to make long-term predictions about the climate – it’s a chaotic system after all. If that’s the case, then we are probably trying to redesign the global economy for nothing”.
I’ve been saying that’s likely the case for years. I’ll look forward to reading her paper.
The EM-1 Analysis
This is a good overview of the issues involved in deciding to fly crew on the first flight. If they decide to do this, I don’t want to hear a single word about delaying Commercial Crew until it is “safe” enough.
[Update a while later]
Wow, never been a big George Abbey (senior) fan, but he’s calling for cancellation of SLS:
Abbey thinks the architecture of NASA’s future plans should be thoroughly examined and redrawn. It won’t even require a budgetary increase — just a smarter allocation of the currently available funding. For instance, he suggests scrapping the SLS program altogether. There’s too much redundancy in the heavy-lift rocket market — SpaceX is working on their Falcon Heavy, Blue Origin is busy developing the New Glenn booster, and United Launch Alliance is drawing up plans for a Vulcan rocket.
From his lips to Trump’s (and Congress’s) ears.
[Wednesday-morning update]
Another call to end SLS/Orion, over at Scientific American, from Howard Bloom:
If NASA ditched the Space Launch System and the Orion, it would free up three billion dollars a year. That budget could speed the Moon-readiness of Bigelow’s landing vehicles, not to mention SpaceX’s Falcon rockets and could pay for lunar enhancements to manned Dragon 2 capsules. In fact, three billion dollars a year is far greater than what Bigelow and Musk would need. That budget would also allow NASA to bring Jeff Bezos into the race. And it would let NASA refocus its energy on earth-orbit and lunar-surface refueling stations…plus rovers, lunar construction equipment, and devices to turn lunar ice into rocket fuel, drinkable water, and breathable oxygen. Not to mention machines to turn lunar dust and rock into building materials.
This new Moon program could be achieved within NASA’s current budget. In fact, members of the group I run — the Space Development Steering Committee — estimate the total cost of what I’ve described (Moon landings plus a permanent moon base) at ten billion dollars. That’s just three years’ worth of the money currently being funneled into the SLS and the Orion.
At some point, this will become conventional wisdom.
[Update a few minutes later]
Wayne Hale has a prescription for NASA that is politically impossible to fill. I’d note that there’s nothing new about this; many of us observed these problems in the 80s and 90s. It’s what happens to a bureaucracy when what it does is not nationally important, it’s captured by its customers, and Congress can do whatever it wants secure in the knowledge that none of it will affect an election.
Light Blogging
Working on a new venture, an op-ed about the hypocrisy of the NASA safety culture, renovating the house, and a long essay on the potential for private robotic planetary exploration.
SpaceX In 2017
Their year is off to a good start, and it could continue to be historic, barring any further mishaps. Falcon Heavy flying will put additional pressure on the SLS program.
Self-Driving Cars
People are not rational about risk.